What is your take on high efficient speakers vs. low efficient speakers?

Johnk is not wrong.  High efficiency speakers are much more dynamic sounding, at least in part, because they suffer less from thermal compression.  When playing at any given level, the higher efficiency speaker will be passing much less current and the voice coil will not be heating up as much as is the case with a low efficiency speaker.  That heating of the wire causes an increase in the resistance of the wire, which means, when there is an even stronger current that is suppose to flow, the amount that can flow is reduced and not proportionate to what is supposed to flow.  This results in compression (less than proportionate increase in the current flowing and the resulting movement of the diaphragm).  

The increase in dynamics of high efficiency horn systems is evident even at quite low volume levels.  In fact, I tend to find that it is MOST evident when playing music at modest levels--high efficiency systems sound more lively.  

@Johnk. My apologies Johnk - I misconstrued your answer.  We both agree that high efficient speakers are more dynamic.

We are all basing our opinions and experiences using " reproduced / recorded " music. As I have said many times, this alone, creates many challenges for us as listeners. It boils down to the specifics of what YOU want your favorite performers to sound like, in your own listening room. Debating on these threads, simply shows how different we all are as listeners. Every system....every part of every system ( room being critical ), will be taxed in some way....great in some areas, and just ok in others. This is why so many listeners I communicate with, only listen to greatly recorded music ( things like Sheffield Labs, just as an example ). We make the decision of what we like, what we want, and how we think it should sound. My system allows me to " forget " the system, and creates a connection between me, and who I am listening to. On another thread, Ron Carter was mentioned, and there were three points R.C. discussed as being very important for his reproduction of his system. # 1 : was to allow him to hear the sound of the studio space; # 2 : was to allow him to hear the sound of the live venue; # 3 : was to allow him to hear  his " playing " of his instrument. For me, number 3 is ALL about our pursuit of musical enjoyment. Whatever works for you......Enjoy ! Always, MrD.

@larryi agree for 100% , i mention in my early post regarding high-efficincy --dont go down. Big size drivers included the very best 15’ Tannoy got much higher resonance to compare heavy cone with rubber surround. . Dont use Sub. We find solution to use high eff. 10 "light paper woofer with fabric surround and another 10" woofer with rubber surround and build in amp ( active) to cover 24-80hz . If anybody lost chance to listen in NY , they can listen in CAF this year.

@Mrdecible Mrd. Does that means that the audio speakers/systems are equally great just because we like them, and how do you extrapolate the fact that some audiophiles have exponentially longer experience? Some have learned from casual listening here and there and others from numerous encounters ,with different systems, in their own homes: some have learned from the very top end systems and others not so; some can hear and interpret the sound way better than others; some have more exposure to live music and others have less; some have extensive collection of LP’s, discs or even master tapes and others no so. I hope you get my drift. The point is - although, it is great that one might enjoy the sound they hear, it doesn’t make them equally qualified to become an experts at high fidelity. Otherwise, why bother have a forum like this? I like this he likes that, let’s all be happy because we enjoy what we hear. That cannot be right , it’s got to be a better, more objective way, which I believe we  have already, but no one wants to listen.